Blakeley v. Gunderson et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
BARRY BLAKELEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
DANIEL G. GUNDERSON, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 3:22-cv-00035-SLG
WARNING NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF AND ORDER
At Dockets 36 and 37, e Defendants have filed a Motion for Judgment on
the Pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Because Mr. Blakeley is a self-represented litigant, the Court gives him the
following notice.1
WARNING NOTICE TO MR. BLAKELEY:
Defendants’ motion seeks judgment on the pleadings in their favor. 	If
granted, their motion will end your case. 	A motion for judgment on the pleadings
can be properly granted if, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true,
1 It is this District’s practice to provide warning notices to all self-represented litigants who face
summary judgment or other dispositive motions, even though district courts are only required to
provide such notices when a litigant is a self-represented prisoner. See Jacobsen v. Filler, 790
F.2d 1362, 1364–67 (9th Cir. 1986) (rejecting argument that the enhanced notice rules for pro se
prisoners “should be extended to all pro se litigants”); see also Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952,
957 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc) (“The concern for meaningful access for the pro se litigant
provides a basis for the fair notice rule, but it is not sufficient in itself to justify its application.”).
Case 3:22-cv-00035-SLG Document 39 Filed 10/05/22 Page 1 of 3

Case No. 3:22-cv-00035-SLG, Blakeley v. Gunderson
Warning Notice Re: Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Page 2 of 3
there are no disputed material issues of fact, and the moving party is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law.2
You must demonstrate that the facts you allege in your complaint, if true,
establish that you are entitled to a legal remedy.3 Defendants’ motion may attack
the claims in your complaint either on the ground that they lack a cognizable legal
theory, or on the ground that you have not alleged sufficient facts under a
cognizable legal theory.4 	You must show that your complaint “is plausible on its
face,” which means that you must show that it “pleads factual content that allows
the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged.”5 	When responding to Defendants’ motion, you may only
reference evidence and exhibits that are attached to your complaint or that your
complaint incorporates by reference.6
2 Herrera v. Zumiez, Inc., 953 F.3d 1063, 1068 (9th Cir. 2020).
3 See Chavez v. United States, 683 F.3d 1102, 1108 (9th Cir. 2012) (“Analysis under Rule 12(c)
is ‘substantially identical’ to analysis under Rule 12(b)(6) because, under both rules, ‘a court
must determine whether the facts alleged in the complaint, taken as true, entitle the plaintiff to a
legal remedy.’” (quoting Brooks v. Dunlop Mfg. Inc., No. C 10–04341 CRB, 2011 WL 6140912, at
*3 (N.D.Cal. Dec. 9, 2011))).
4 See, e.g., Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988) (“Dismissal [of a
complaint] can be based on the lack of a cognizable legal theory or the absence of sufficient
facts alleged under a cognizable legal theory.”).
5 Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly v. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. 544,
556, 570 (2007)).
6 See United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2003) (“A court may, however,
consider certain materials—documents attached to the complaint, documents incorporated by
reference in the complaint, or matters of judicial notice—without converting the motion to
dismiss into a motion for summary judgment.”).
Case 3:22-cv-00035-SLG Document 39 Filed 10/05/22 Page 2 of 3

Case No. 3:22-cv-00035-SLG, Blakeley v. Gunderson
Warning Notice Re: Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Page 3 of 3
Please note that Local Civil Rule 7.4 requires that unless otherwise ordered,
opposition memoranda must not exceed 35 pages or 10,000 words.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff has until on or before 21 days after the date of this order to
serve and file on Defendant any opposition to Defendant’s Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings at Dockets 36 and 37.
2. Defendants have until 14 days after service of Plaintiff’s opposition to
serve and file a reply.
DATED this 5th day of October, 2022, at Anchorage, Alaska.
/s/ Sharon L. Gleason
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:22-cv-00035-SLG Document 39 Filed 10/05/22 Page 3 of 3